Heavy advertising and "Closing the Deal"

[panAmerican]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/21/101329/641/413/499969">Cross posted on Kos:

I want to explore the importance of money in "closing the deal". The protracted race is not evidence of Sen. Obama's inability to close the deal. Rather, the spending levels of his campaign illustrate why incumbents rarely lose, and why a challenger needs a tremendous ability to raise funds.

Much like a charity, a radio station or any other organization that accepts individual contributions, a political campaign doesn't take particular notice of the source unless a donor crosses a certain threshold of giving. A large donation suggests that you are committed to the cause, predicts that you will respond favorably to future requests, and signals that you may have power to influence similarly-situated individuals to donate as well.

At this stage your opinion counts for something and you are invited along with other valuable contributors to join producers' circles, advisory boards, outreach committees and the like. Otherwise, a listener's point of view can only reach as far as an online comment, which may or may not chosen to be read during the broadcast, or a brief interaction with the host if he or she makes it on the air. The size of your donation is the conduit to power.

Likewise, someone who wishes to run for office, especially against incumbents of their own party, needs to establish their own infrastructure. Better-known candidates have name recognition and established relationships that can mobilize cash and other resources in short order. They have the networks of both paid and unpaid surrogates to propagate their message to the electorate. The challenger needs more than word-of-mouth advertising; they need to invest in some paid staff that can dedicate all their energies to communicating with the target audience.

Some weeks ago, Cablevision's News12 broadcast a segment of a women’s symposium that featured a panel of influential NJ women, including a judge and an elected official. When the topic turned to encouraging women to run for office, a member of the audience asked what she must do to groom herself to enter politics. A panelist very quickly advised that a primary qualification is to become a prolific fundraiser. In essence, her capacity to lead and the quality of her ideas are subordinate to her fundraising ability. That is the unfortunate by-product of our political process which circumvents equalized public funding, and therefore public accountability.

The saving grace of this system that allows unequal access to the public's ears, is that if the message of the challenger resonates with enough voters, the latter can then respond overwhelmingly by donating to the cause, thereby displacing the undue influence of a much smaller but far wealthier contingent.

We should still strive to elect enough lawmakers that have the will to enact better legislation to govern use of and payment for the public airwaves. In the meantime, we the people must exercise our power by donating even $5, $10, $25 at a time. When we fail to regularly engage our friends, families and local media in a discussion of our problems and possible solutions, we abdicate our civic responsibility, and then professional politicians and lobbyists gain the upper hand.

While Senator Clinton's wealthy donors are not to be undermined, Senator Obama's campaign is to be congratulated for creating real buy-in with the voters. Before he came along, few politicians of caliber would bother to solicit such small sums as $5. With Sen. Obama, it is the hallmark of his approach. He started his career serving and teaching poor people to stand up for themselves, and he thinks highly enough of them that it's worth his time to solicit and graciously accept whatever they can afford to give.

When you hear Sen. Clinton express that she needs all the help she can get to survive her opponent's 3-to-1 advertising onslaught, remember that the number of individual donors who enable Sen. Obama to do so, far outnumber those supporting Sen. Clinton, or any other presidential candidate in history for that matter.